There was a Puppy 4.32 project, but ttuuxxx replaced it with Puppy 4.3.2-SCSI 2.6.30.5 full older modem support.

Am I misunderstanding something? It seems to me that this thread is rumbling along without knowing all the facts!

--------------------------------

This thread was started by Hideho and is about Hideho telling people and asking people about Puppy 4.3.1 and "bringing it back"

If the thread was actuall about Puppy 432 then im sure people would comment on it etc but its not, its about 4.3.1

So i dont know why you think people dont have their facts right as Puppy 432 isnt a fact that has anything to do with "bringing back Puppy 431. Using the same logic in your post, I could claim that people dont have their facts right because there is a newer Puppy 525 released now and ask: "Doesnt everybody realize that?"

Bringing back/ upgrading 4.3.1 upgrading it and re-releasing it is not doing the same as bringing back Puppy 432, just as it is nothing to do with bringing back any other Puppy version other than 4.3.1

ttuuxxx would you consider using this. Bigmike has his first 431 based os called Bruno pup. http://puppylinuxnews.org/puplets/brunopup-for-good-looks-and-rich-media-interface-based-on-431/ His general idea is to make it user friendly out of the box. which in the most part it is. After talking to him he would like to update it but he did say if it was going to be as much work as Sickgut says earlier in this forum then he may not do it. can you look into Bruno pup and see if that may be a good place to start.

I dont have the skills to do allot of the things needed and i know if i started this project myself i would not be able to do it properly. due to how i am. so if ttuuxxx would like to do it great. but you do what you feel is best.

This thread was started by Hideho and is about Hideho telling people and asking people about Puppy 4.3.1 and "bringing it back"

If the thread was actuall about Puppy 432 then im sure people would comment on it etc but its not, its about 4.3.1

So i dont know why you think people dont have their facts right as Puppy 432 isnt a fact that has anything to do with "bringing back Puppy 431. Using the same logic in your post, I could claim that people dont have their facts right because there is a newer Puppy 525 released now and ask: "Doesnt everybody realize that?"

Bringing back/ upgrading 4.3.1 upgrading it and re-releasing it is not doing the same as bringing back Puppy 432, just as it is nothing to do with bringing back any other Puppy version other than 4.3.1

exactly this is what i am asking. but i did mention about continuing on from 431 track updating it and making a new distro like the pup431-puppeee-fluppy has been doing. i wonder if the devs of fluppy could provide anything that may help with an update of 431.

My original idea was to just see if 431 could have new apps for it.

one way could be to provide an update package that has all the needed libs for updating to newer apps. that can be installed or removed as needed. without the need for the lengthly process that sickgut himself says is needed. This is done with the now far removed pup Lighthouse. they provide an addon .sfs for the bass install with all the things needed.

this would be tha simple way for any 431 based os to be updated with the newer apps.and also it would be a great way to easily update a 431 install on usb. having a 431 on usb is a great thing. works on more Computers.

Ya know, all that's been asked is a stable basic occasionally bug fixed version of 4.3x software.

A year ago I went and committed all our comps here to "4.3.2 test v3", which was supposed to be just that. Nothing fancy, just a dependable stable supported version of 4.3x.

Then it was dropped. A supposedly long term dependable puppy linux had a life of about a few months.

And then a "new" 4.3.2 with bugs and new stuff was begun. Totally confusing same version number for a different OS. And so defeating the entire reason for the original concept, and stranding those who commited to it and believed it was going to be there for the count.

Okay so what's different now? Yet another bugfixed stable long term what --- 4.3.1? -- adding even more confusion to this version numbering system.

Will this replace one of the 4.3.2s as the latest and greatest retro for a few months until 4.3.0 comes along?

The point is, many of us want a stable reasonably secure system, not a system which requires constantly upgraded re-installs with different software, new bugs, different kernels, and a long period of adapting to our everyday use and hardware peculiarities.

Right now I'm trying to figure out just what devx I should use with our current 4.3.2 v3. Should I use the one from the new 4.3.2? 4,3,1? and which of the various devx's for those. Or is a devx for 4.3.2 v3 even available anymore?

Sorry, to seem negative -- I'm all for this concept of a stable 4.3.x and would be happy to support with testing as I have with other efforts in the past. But even here, again we are seeing suggestions for feature creep, and using confusing version number suggestions, and I think, yet another dead end for something simple, dependable and long term.

Okay, sorry, positive suggestions to move things in the right direction:

Get rid of 4.3.2 designations altogether, re-name those software efforts and call them Modpuppy 4.3x or something similar, since that's what they are, new puplets, not 4.3.x anything. This will prevent confusion with the effort here.

Now, call this new proposed version 4.3.1.1 or even 4.3.3 and for heaven's sake don't change kernels. And get Barry's imprimateur on it as THE official 4.3.x. latest.

Keep this as a single continual 4.3 lineage, not a bunch of parallel latest and greatest 4.3 forks, and not a parallel line of development to new 5.x-10.x or alternative puplet software.

We will then have what apparently has been asked by many, and attempted several times already without real success, despite much programming effort already.

Quote
A year ago I went and committed all our comps here to "4.3.2 test v3", which was supposed to be just that. Nothing fancy, just a dependable stable supported version of 4.3x.
end quote

- I've had similar circumstances in work environment so can certainly empathize, But believe that any work on Puppy is worthwhile, just like this thread has come "alive" it is going to spark interest toward the "V3" also, all of these 4 series are too good to be forgotten.

- Also wasn't this about the time the "Ca" host provider erased all the puppy files???, if I was a suspicious sole, might think it was MS behind a curtain pulling some monetary leverage strings. !!!Gosh we could by you some new servers, IF only this wasn't on them!!!

- If anybody laments all the poorly described names, lack of kernel designations, descriptions of what it does, comparisons to anything previous - etecra that would be ME, but as a "DUH" doze refugee-
It is a "Trivial Price to Pay" for the truly miraculous system of any PUPPY.

- However, at this point of time would probably vote to not rename most of the series, unless it includes kernel + full date of release- a.k.a.:
431v2_26305_04112011.iso

I remember vaguely I did an install on an USB and it failed on my Acer D250 and the one that worked best was Fluppy and maybe that one are almost 431 but with more drivers and KILLRF and other things added that my Acer needed.

So if Puppy don't work on my Acer that is a much sold product then it is better to use Fluppy than 431. Fluppy also worked on my Desktop so it is a good OS that Jemimah has done.

So if there is a need for Puppy 431 then it should learn from the knowledge that Jemimah did put into Fluppy._________________I use Google Search on Puppy Forum
not an ideal solution though

Nooby, I'm actually all for a 4.3.x bugfixed maintained version, and frankly don't care what it is called if it were actually available. I was being somewhat rhetorical, so please forgive the tone. It was more to draw attention to the topic than anything else.

I hope that something will come of this.

To be honest the ideal for me would simply be a completion of the first "Official 4.3.2" (v3) which has been very stable for a year for me, and reportedly others.

As far as I know it offers just what was promised: conservative main line traditional puppy, with updates, running on a range of old and new hardware, bugfixed, stable, using the official and popular kernel versions.

Quote:

Well Barry mentioned I could release a 4.3.2 bug fix release and doing so will buy some time for 5 series to be released in about 5 weeks, At this point in time that is what I'm prepared to do and have started. I'll spend maybe 1-2 days on this and I won't be taking over 4 series right now but I'll build a 4.3.2 bug release based on 4.3.1.

The only thing lacking as far as I remember it was that xvesa needed fixing.

It seems that if it could just be "completed". we'd have just what is being asked here.

The problem is that the desire to "improve" gradually sneaks in over the desire to correct bugs, and off we go into a new kernel, and new applications, and new support libraries, new browsers and effectively, a new puplet. Yet another doggy with new fleas.

It's understandable, fixing bugs isn't glamorous and always suggests newer more exciting apps. But frankly new Firefox or Opera, or alternate app pups are a dime a dozen. I know -- I wrote one myself a while back.

Why a 4.3.x bugfix edition? I don't want a new puppy I gotta house train to fit in again. I work at my job every day with Puppy Linux, and my wife does as well, I want a well mannered standard dog, with a recent flea bath, and all shots.

There's always a CD RW available for some alternative puplet if the urge arises to experiment. But the HD is always going to aim grub first at a 4 series puppy, day in, day out.

Seems to be V2 then? What did TTuuuxxx change in V3 that is not fixed in this older one? I ahve a kind of pseudo scsi so that maybe works. I test it.

Sadly it has SeaMonkey in it. It should be like Lupu. That one have Quickpet and can chose the browser and not be dependent on what the Dev prefer._________________I use Google Search on Puppy Forum
not an ideal solution though

Even the one you did recommend. None of the managed to give me internet while Fluppy does, Puppeee does Lupu does and many others does. Wary does give me internet. Lighthouse Puppy gives me internet.

So I fail to support that we go back to 431 or use 432 until that is solved. And to have to shut down and pull the plug to repair that it failed to make use of the LAN card is too much to expect a newbie to figure out. Took me a very long time to find that trick.

My older text
I did not have access to that one. You could have linked to it

I tested two others those I did link to and both of them failed to get internet on my Acer D250 and both failed to play Mp4 and both of them failed to show 1024x768 which Lupu does they showed 1024x600 which logically is correct but not what I as user told it to use.

The worst thing with one ofthese two was that it turned off the Lan card so that SnowPuppy could not use the LAN either.

So I had to fall back on shutting down and taking out the power plug to the socket so the RAM could forget what the faulty Puppy has told it to do to shut down the LAN.
Are you sure that the one you have there can get to internet on my gear?

If you really want to know if it works on modern Netbooks then I am willing to try.
Edit. I go test it now to find out. Wish me good luck

I should look but my memory tell me that both Fluppy and LHP are based on puppy431 so are they not good enough. Why do you want plain 431 is not Fluppy plain enough? What is so bling bling too much about that one?_________________I use Google Search on Puppy Forum
not an ideal solution though

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forumYou cannot attach files in this forumYou can download files in this forum